Originally Posted by Goldwingnut (Post 2092289)

Both are owned by the Brownwood CDD (a unit of local government not a private entity -aka the developer) and are included in Exhibit A of the Project Wide Agreement as are most of the public/entertainment areas in both LSL and BW. So, under the terms of the Project Wide Agreement the maintenance will fall to the Project Wide Fund. They are no different than many other structures and facilities in the community owned by all the CDDs that fall under the agreement, the key difference in my mind is that these are purely ornamental and have no functional need or requirement.

Knowing well the current PWF budget and having seen the proposed budstill being worked for next fiscal year I'm still on the fence with this "emergency?"get that is budget item. How did they get in this condition so fast? Why are we only just now seeing the problem? How does a real windmill last decades on a farm but just 10 years in the town square? What will be lost if both are just raised and not rebuilt? How many residents have ever noticed they even existed? What are the legal responsibilities for the Project Wide Agreement to keep/replace the feature? These and many more unanswered questions need to be answered.

Originally Posted by dewilson58 (Post 2092978)

Per CDD Website for Brownwood:

Maintenance of the infrastructure is provided through an annual assessment to commercial property owners based upon square footage of the benefitting properties.


:shrug::shrug::shrug:

Originally Posted by rustyp (Post 2093094)

If this is solely the developer's responsibility .

Originally Posted by Bogie Shooter (Post 2092977)

Palms could be planted and then the whiners could bitch why they were not being trimmed.:a040:

Originally Posted by dewilson58 (Post 2092978)

Per CDD Website for Brownwood:

Maintenance of the infrastructure is provided through an annual assessment to commercial property owners based upon square footage of the benefitting properties.


:shrug::shrug::shrug:

Originally Posted by dewilson58 (Post 2093098)

It's not.

Originally Posted by rustyp (Post 2093101)

Help

Originally Posted by dewilson58 (Post 2093107)

Now that being said, it's pretty difficult to draw a solid line from revenue sources to expenditures.................so I'm not shocked if we all pay for the replacements one way or another. What's it going to cost each of us???........$5 maybe. Not worth all the hot air posts.

Originally Posted by rustyp (Post 2093114)

Wow - a definite maybe the expenditure gets back to us but it doesn't matter - it's so little. OK!

Originally Posted by rustyp (Post 2093114)

Wow - a definite maybe the expenditure gets back to us but it doesn't matter - it's so little. OK!

Originally Posted by Goldwingnut (Post 2092289)

Both are owned by the Brownwood CDD (a unit of local government not a private entity - aka the developer) and are included in Exhibit A of the Project Wide Agreement as are most of the public/entertainment areas in both LSL and BW. So, under the terms of the Project Wide Agreement the maintenance will fall to the Project Wide Fund. They are no different than many other structures and facilities in the community owned by all the CDDs that fall under the agreement, the key difference in my mind is that these are purely ornamental and have no functional need or requirement.

Knowing well the current PWF budget and having seen the proposed budget that is still being worked for next fiscal year I'm still on the fence with this "emergency?" budget item. How did they get in this condition so fast? Why are we only just now seeing the problem? How does a real windmill last decades on a farm but just 10 years in the town square? What will be lost if both are just raised and not rebuilt? How many residents have ever noticed they even existed? What are the legal responsibilities for the Project Wide Agreement to keep/replace the feature? These and many more unanswered questions need to be answered.

Originally Posted by JoMar (Post 2093263)

I don't think the entertainment square is the Developers responsibility since it is there for the enjoyment of the public therefore is the responsibility of the residents to maintain it. The infrastructure is what supports the rental properties which is what the renters contribute to. The business's also contribute to the nightly entertainment, as does the Developer. I'm happy we have a system in place that takes care of this stuff without imposing an additional assessment on the residents every time something fails. Another mountain growing from that ant hill.

Originally Posted by tophcfa (Post 2093100)

Whining about whiners!

Originally Posted by JoMar (Post 2093263)

I don't think the entertainment square is the Developers responsibility since it is there for the enjoyment of the public therefore is the responsibility of the residents to maintain it.

Originally Posted by Bilyclub (Post 2093309)

So if you think the residents are responsible for the maintaining the squares then they should be for residents and guests only. But then TV would lose the Sumter County contribution of $150,000 for entertainment at LSL and BPS.

Originally Posted by JoMar (Post 2093263)

Another mountain growing from that ant hill.

Originally Posted by JoMar (Post 2093345)

That's not what I said. But, twist it whichever way you want.

Originally Posted by JoMar (Post 2093263)

I don't think the entertainment square is the Developers responsibility since it is there for the enjoyment of the public therefore is the responsibility of the residents to maintain it.

Originally Posted by dewilson58 (Post 2092978)

Per CDD Website for Brownwood:

Maintenance of the infrastructure is provided through an annual assessment to commercial property owners based upon square footage of the benefitting properties.


:shrug::shrug::shrug:

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby (Post 2092987)

Not sure how that addresses something that isn't maintenance. Demolition and removal of non-functional outbuildings is not "infrastructure" and isn't "maintenance."

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby (Post 2093390)

Again - the decorative, non-functional windmill and the decorative, non-functional water tower are not infrastructure.

Originally Posted by dewilson58 (Post 2093480)

Actually they are infrastructure.

Also, landscape is part of infrastructure.

Landscape Architects design soft and hard infrastructures.
From LA site:
Landscape infrastructure is an evolutionary approach to strategizing economically and environmentally sustainable multipurpose infrastructure systems, reversing urban sprawl and regenerating our invaluable natural resources.

As the world faces an urgent need for new and repaired infrastructure systems, design and planning professionals have the crucial opportunity to reimagine networks that support multiple uses and functions. Multipurpose infrastructure conserves land, shares the financial load of its development, restores previously overlooked or damaged natural ecologies, reinforces healthy transit options, and provides public access to much needed open space.

Originally Posted by rustyp (Post 2093496)

Critical underlying infrastructure - high maintenance:

Attachment 93645

Originally Posted by Lindsyburnsy (Post 2093550)

Wait until Floridians have to pay for when Disney is no longer it's own governmental unit. That was a super smart move. We showed them!

Originally Posted by Boston1945 (Post 2093587)

Please let's tear it down and move on. Why is this such a huge issue? oh, wait it's going to cost $$$$ everyone in the district. Forget the rebuilding part.

Originally Posted by Bilyclub (Post 2093552)

Took some pics of the problem the other day. Looks like there was a quick fix tried at one time. Somebody forgot that wood will wick moisture if not sealed.

Originally Posted by Bilyclub (Post 2094073)

The Project Wide Advisory Committee on Monday unanimously agreed to allocate up to $20,000 for the demolition of the decorative windmill and water tower at Brownwood Paddock Square.

Originally Posted by Stu from NYC (Post 2094093)

This was in the Sun today and shockingly did not talk about the materials used to build these. Guess the editor was told exactly what to say and not to say. Surprise.

Originally Posted by Stu from NYC (Post 2094093)

This was in the Sun today and shockingly did not talk about the materials used to build these. Guess the editor was told exactly what to say and not to say. Surprise.

Originally Posted by Bogie Shooter (Post 2094108)

“After 10-plus years of weather, humidity, sun and water exposure, the wooden posts on the structures have decayed, according to District Property Management.” The Villages Daily Sun, May 10, 2022

Originally Posted by dewilson58 (Post 2094193)

I think we should have 150 posts on gin costing $2/bottle more than last year.

Gin will only last a month.

New mill & tower will cost $2/person and will last another 10 years.


:clap2::clap2::clap2:

Originally Posted by Stu from NYC (Post 2094093)

This was in the Sun today and shockingly did not talk about the materials used to build these. Guess the editor was told exactly what to say and not to say. Surprise.